Court File and Parties

CITATION: Farm Credit Canada v. Grand Chief White Buffalo Eagle, 2021 ONSC 2188

DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 218/21

DATE: 20210323

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO

DIVISIONAL COURT

RE: Farm Credit Canada, Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim / Responding Party

AND:

Grand Chief White Buffalo Eagle, Wabiska Mukwa by his Envoy minigaydinnong (on behalf of Todd of the Manary Family/owner of 1047537 Ontario Limited under Indigenous Law), Defendants / Plaintiffs by Counterclaim/ Moving Parties

AND:

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Defendant by Counterclaim / Responding Party

AND:

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario, Defendant by Counterclaim / Responding Party

BEFORE: McWatt A.C.J.S.C.J., D.L. Corbett and Favreau JJ.

COUNSEL: Grand Chief Wabiska Mukwa and Todd Manary, the Moving Parties, representing themselves

Michael Cassone, counsel for the Responding Party, Farm Credit Canada

Beverly Bly, counsel for the Responding Party, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada

Thomas Lipton, counsel for the Responding Party, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario

HEARD in writing

DECISION ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

[1] The Moving Parties bring a motion for leave to appeal and a motion to stay the decision of Sweeny R.S.J. dated March 17, 2021.

[2] In a direction dated March 19, 2021, Favreau J. directed the moving parties to serve and file their materials with the Court electronically, after which the Court would give directions on how the motions were to proceed. The matter proceeded in this way because of urgency. The Court further directed that the responding parties were not to serve responding materials unless directed to do so by the Court. In response to the moving parties’ request for an oral hearing, the Court also advised the parties that motions for leave to appeal are considered in writing in accordance with Rule 62.02 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

[3] The panel has reviewed the moving parties’ materials. No responding materials are required. The motion for leave to appeal is dismissed. In the circumstances, the motion for a stay is moot.

[4] Given that the respondents were not required to prepare responding materials, we make no order as to costs.

McWatt A.C.J.S.C.J.

Corbett J.

Favreau J.

Date: March 23, 2021